The Great 'NSB' Divide

There is usually a racial overtone or undertone to most topics of discussion here. Racial insults are usually the lowest common denominator, and often used when a poster runs out of logical reasoning. In my experience I have never met someone who is completely 'colour blind' and impartial on racial issues. And sadly, I can include myself in the above. Our experiences shape our perspective - and that perspective becomes our own personal reality. At the end of the day its all about opinions, right or wrong. The guy below has always been impartial. I only like wladimir, kovalev, golovkin lomochenko, beterbiev. I also like lumineux, canelo, froch, frampton etc. I hate Floyd mayweather and andre ward. Broner is ugly scum of the highest order and deontay wilder is literally the worst champ in the world.

I can respect why you feel this way, but you and I both know this your reasoning is not shared by everyone. You gave Kov a pass for that. OK. A lot of posters did but Danny didn't get a pass for Salka. We can chalk this up to the "Haymon" factor, which brings us right back to the issue the TS brought up. Wilder is just a good example of what some really mean when they say "exciting". When it's him it's not the KO the want to see, it's who is getting the KO and who is getting KTFO that matters. That is what I find very peculiar and wish I could determine exactly why it seems to happen. Sorry man, but I think you misunderstood me on the Garcia. Herrera was his easy fight past Matthysse. When that went horribly wrong they had to go and cherry pick probably the worst cherry pick in current memory. It was so awful that not even a sanctioning body sanctioned that fight.

I think your looking to much into race as a factor. What about personality types? The Broners and the Mayweathers have similarities in how they talk and act(how they conduct themselves. The GGG's, Wards, and canelos(even Ward) conduct themselves in a very different manner. It may be a question of demographics and not solely race. But that's my point. You've got posters that war for Ward, Mayweather and Broner. And Ward is indeed very different to the other too?!

I think your looking to much into race as a factor. What about personality types? The Broners and the Mayweathers have similarities in how they talk and act(how they conduct themselves. The GGG's, Wards, and canelos(even Ward) conduct themselves in a very different manner. It may be a question of demographics and not solely race.

You make a thread about GGG, someone posts a video about him being hated on because they are racist. I comment on both and it's not the place for it? WTF? Lol, you're a few fries short of a happy meal my friend. Murray isn't the bottom of the barrel, and neither was Geale. So what? Lara and Trout weren't bottom of the barrel either but when you follow that up Monroe, Angulo and Kirkland... you're going to get sh*t for it when before them they fought bottom of the barrel competition and then went right back to bums. Fighting 2 B class fighters in 30, and in Canelo's case nearly 50 pro-fights, you aren't fighting tough competition. There is no Floyd, Manny or even Cotto resume (win or loss) type of names on a their lists (except Canelo's schooling). It's a list of has beens, never was, with a good fighter here and there, that's a weak ass resume and both get sh*t for it as they should. Haha what the ****. The thread isn't solely about GGG clearly, i don't have to explain what the thread is about as EVERYONE else has understood it, if you don't read the first post again bruv. Someone then posted a video of people talking about GGG in the CONTEXT of what this thread is about so that is perfectly fine and it's in line. Then you start arguing about **** involving Golovkin like he's fought bottom of the barrel fighters and that can be argued on hundreds of other threads. So as i said, this isn't the thread for that ****. I like your happy meal anology though! Yum.

Part of the reason why it seems so hostile is because boxing has always been on the forefront in terms of racial/ethnic/and nationalistic competition. In the US, it was one of the first sports to be integrated to some degree. Joey Gans became the first well known black titlist in the early 1900's while a sport like MLB was enforcing a color line. We always find ourselves right in the thick of the turmoil that transpires when people really believe it's "us vs. them." Primal stuff It doesn't always turn out well and there have been examples of ugly scenes following some notable fights (eg race riots after Johnson-Willard). Even in my own experience, I have seen numerous examples of what can only be described as large brawls/beatdowns between two races/nationalities (pretty sure I witnessed a hate crime at Khan/Molina:eek:). Stuff like this is a drawbrack to being on the forefront - it attracts people who like to get involved in these little in-group/out group wars, or who use a fight as a proxy to further a political agenda. They ruin the people who are there who are just legitimately showing pride of their culture or are choosing to take sides for fun As you say, the longer you stick with watching boxing... the more and more these barriers break down because of the nature of the sport itself. Most rational people will have no choice but come to respect these men from all over the world who put it all on the line. Not all of them, of course, but enough to realize that we all people can relate through the values displayed in the ring. I'd be that even most hardcore racists would find it hard to make a list of his/her favorites and not have someone from outside his group on it. There is something about the clash of cultures that boxing brings that allows you to learn more about the good/bad of others than you do in other sports...and I think(hope) that even though it can get real ugly - the fact that we do so openly that the fans who stick around come out the better for it (without even really realizing it either). It's still a sport with minimal political correctness which is very different from the big corporate sports and I hope it stays like that. Really good post mate. Very well written contribution.

This is my first thread on the 'Non Stop Boxing' section of the forums and only my second thread on Boxingscene ever, so apologies in advance for anything not up to par! This thread is just about an observation I've made since joining officially in May but also since I've been "looking" in on this part of the forum for over a year. The observation I've made is one I'm sure a lot of you posters on here have not only noticed but been a part of. The Great 'NSB' Divide that I'm talking about is the apparent, clear and frustrating split between the PRO-PACQUIAO PRO-GOLOVKIN fans and the PRO-MAYWEATHER PRO-WARD fans. Generally (stop me if I'm wrong) the PRO-PAC PRO-GGG fans claim the same bull**** like "hugging" "ducking" "running" when discussion a variety of things like, MayPac, GGG-Ward and Lara, and the latter (PRO-MAY PRO-WARD) claim all of the above is bull**** and then go to war and bicker and fight with the others and it gets really stupid with name calling and nick names for fighters like "Bumlovkin" "G@yweather" and "Pacro!ds". I can even go as far as say I think their is a racial element to this, with some poster and I do stress not all but some posters who defend Mayweather and Ward every single day are African-American members and they defend and argue other black fighters like Lara and Broner and also seem to attack the white eastern-block fighters like Kovalev, Golovkin, Klitschko (rightly so in my view) and shockingly Lomachencko! The PRO PACQUIAO PRO GOLOVKIN boys also seem to defend other white boxers, some named above, and they also appear to comment on threads about black fighters and "dig them out" with name calling and bickering. What do you all think? Can't we all just = :luvbed: (Spoon23 excluded) Discuss.... hit the nail on the head lol too many fighter fans and too few fight fans

Part of the reason why it seems so hostile is because boxing has always been on the forefront in terms of racial/ethnic/and nationalistic competition. In the US, it was one of the first sports to be integrated to some degree. Joey Gans became the first well known black titlist in the early 1900's while a sport like MLB was enforcing a color line. We always find ourselves right in the thick of the turmoil that transpires when people really believe it's "us vs. them." Primal stuff It doesn't always turn out well and there have been examples of ugly scenes following some notable fights (eg race riots after Johnson-Willard). Even in my own experience, I have seen numerous examples of what can only be described as large brawls/beatdowns between two races/nationalities (pretty sure I witnessed a hate crime at Khan/Molina:eek:). Stuff like this is a drawbrack to being on the forefront - it attracts people who like to get involved in these little in-group/out group wars, or who use a fight as a proxy to further a political agenda. They ruin the people who are there who are just legitimately showing pride of their culture or are choosing to take sides for fun As you say, the longer you stick with watching boxing... the more and more these barriers break down because of the nature of the sport itself. Most rational people will have no choice but come to respect these men from all over the world who put it all on the line. Not all of them, of course, but enough to realize that we all people can relate through the values displayed in the ring. I'd be that even most hardcore racists would find it hard to make a list of his/her favorites and not have someone from outside his group on it. There is something about the clash of cultures that boxing brings that allows you to learn more about the good/bad of others than you do in other sports...and I think(hope) that even though it can get real ugly - the fact that we do so openly that the fans who stick around come out the better for it (without even really realizing it either). It's still a sport with minimal political correctness which is very different from the big corporate sports and I hope it stays like that.

Yep. It's pretty much divided along racial lines. It will stay that way even after Mayweather/Pacquiao are long gone. You don't even have to read their posts. You just have to see who's posting.

With Floyd/Pac i just always thought Floyd was better and throw in that i have suspicions of Pac, Floyd side is the side I choose Ward/GGG I think Ward is better but i do like GGG alot. I always say i think he is the good but with him i dont think he has shown it yet and unlike some on NSB im not prepared to call him an ATG. Loma i like but i dont like that he got a title shot so quick while other have slaved away for years hoping for one but whatver hes good. Kov is real Wlad i think should be considered an ATG. Yes comp in his era sucked but he dominated for years and everyone around him. Mainly it comes down to the fans. Some are delusional and i have no idea what they are smoking but i want some. 2 fights this year (Wilder & Ward) and Vegas for May/Pac. I just love the sport and love to watch it. I only like wladimir, kovalev, golovkin lomochenko, beterbiev. I also like lumineux, canelo, froch, frampton etc. I hate Floyd mayweather and andre ward. Broner is ugly scum of the highest order and deontay wilder is literally the worst champ in the world.

To me, there's a huge skill discrepancy between Caparello and Kovalev. We all knew what has happening, but it taken in stride because Kovalev was just looking to stay busy. We kind of knew, or hoped, that a big fight with Stevenson was just around the corner so whatever. He gets a pass for that. Danny came off what seemed like a roberry to fight Salka, when people wanted the Herrera rematch. We know about his retard left hook, and we know what would happen to the 77th ranked dude from the division below. He was served up to make Danny look good, of course, backfires because Salka was just too overmatched, for a guy coming off his biggest win (Matthysse) then having his cherry pick gone wrong. Herrera was picked to make Danny look good, and it backfired. It was a "homecoming fight" GGG-Monroe: Only guy that's available @ 160 willing to step up. I don't want to get into the Ward discussion, but Monroe at least had won the boxcino tournament. We all knew he was going to get eaten by GGG. I'm not writing it as a major victory for GGG, it was just another stay busy top20/15 win for GGG, while he keeps waiting to unify. I wasn't terribly excited about it, but I'm not going to pretend that the politics of the sport don't exist. Eh, it was just another fight. Kirkland had never been beaten like that, but same thing happened with Ishida so some people shouldn't read too much into it. Those are just my thoughts, I think that's the difference of why Deontay doesn't get the exciting tag. People tuned in for the Stiverne fight, but then he followed up with Molina when he could have tried to get someone else similar to Stiverne at least to keep the wind in his sails. I can respect why you feel this way, but you and I both know this your reasoning is not shared by everyone. You gave Kov a pass for that. OK. A lot of posters did but Danny didn't get a pass for Salka. We can chalk this up to the "Haymon" factor, which brings us right back to the issue the TS brought up. Wilder is just a good example of what some really mean when they say "exciting". When it's him it's not the KO the want to see, it's who is getting the KO and who is getting KTFO that matters. That is what I find very peculiar and wish I could determine exactly why it seems to happen.

Funny, Im sure you were high on Kirkland when he stopped Angulo. No I wasn't. You know that. In fact, after Floyd, I like Danny Garcia, Glenn Tapia, and Omar Figueroa. I still ride with Leo Santa cruz (just not as hard).

There is usually a racial overtone or undertone to most topics of discussion here. Racial insults are usually the lowest common denominator, and often used when a poster runs out of logical reasoning. In my experience I have never met someone who is completely 'colour blind' and impartial on racial issues. And sadly, I can include myself in the above. Our experiences shape our perspective - and that perspective becomes our own personal reality. At the end of the day its all about opinions, right or wrong.

Respectfully, I can't worry about that but I can understand your point. I will try and refrain from that in the future. You are getting at my exact point- the definition of "exciting". Deontay KOing a bum, well talk about the bum. Garcia KOing Salka, talk about Salka. Kov koing Caparello, talk about Kov's power. GGG koing Monroe, talk about Monroe and his ranking, not if he had a chance or not. Canelo koing Kirkland, talk about the KO, not Kirkland being out for so long. That is a huge difference to me. I'd really like to know why it exists. Funny, Im sure you were high on Kirkland when he stopped Angulo.

TS is right....it's a race war on the board...no sugarcoating!! I've been accused MANY MANY times of ONLY supporting black fighters....but you can find me on the frontline battling for Swift, Cotto, Khan, Paulie and even Froch at times....no secret, I support Philly fighters over EVERY fighter...I don't care what color their skin is, if they come from Philly they have my FULL support...I don't like to use the word HATE, but there's ONLY a fw fighters I will NEVER root for...Berto, Haye, Cintron and Bute...those dudes will NEVER get my support...so for ALL the dudes who study which race of fighters get defended and by who they get defended by...this is my bio....miss me with the race card I think I relate to and talk more with the Rican posters....some of my best friends in REAL life are Rican....I get along with the Brits, they're REAL cool on here...I rarely have run ins with them....the Mexicans don't really annoy me but they have certain ways that I choose to ignore...the art of beig smart is to know what to overlook...so I don't really politic with most of them...they know why....the white Americans I talk with on here are cool as well...I have no problem with them....the Eastern European cats on here have certain ways I choose to overlook as well...they know why there's a few posters I wanna put hands on like JF whatever....just wanna choke his ass sometimes :lol1: Why? Because you're a fckng pvssy? :thinking::fing26::sombrero:

Respectfully, I can't worry about that but I can understand your point. I will try and refrain from that in the future. You are getting at my exact point- the definition of "exciting". Deontay KOing a bum, well talk about the bum. Garcia KOing Salka, talk about Salka. Kov koing Caparello, talk about Kov's power. GGG koing Monroe, talk about Monroe and his ranking, not if he had a chance or not. Canelo koing Kirkland, talk about the KO, not Kirkland being out for so long. That is a huge difference to me. I'd really like to know why it exists. To me, there's a huge skill discrepancy between Caparello and Kovalev. We all knew what has happening, but it taken in stride because Kovalev was just looking to stay busy. We kind of knew, or hoped, that a big fight with Stevenson was just around the corner so whatever. He gets a pass for that. Danny came off what seemed like a roberry to fight Salka, when people wanted the Herrera rematch. We know about his retard left hook, and we know what would happen to the 77th ranked dude from the division below. He was served up to make Danny look good, of course, backfires because Salka was just too overmatched, for a guy coming off his biggest win (Matthysse) then having his cherry pick gone wrong. Herrera was picked to make Danny look good, and it backfired. It was a "homecoming fight" GGG-Monroe: Only guy that's available @ 160 willing to step up. I don't want to get into the Ward discussion, but Monroe at least had won the boxcino tournament. We all knew he was going to get eaten by GGG. I'm not writing it as a major victory for GGG, it was just another stay busy top20/15 win for GGG, while he keeps waiting to unify. I wasn't terribly excited about it, but I'm not going to pretend that the politics of the sport don't exist. Eh, it was just another fight. Kirkland had never been beaten like that, but same thing happened with Ishida so some people shouldn't read too much into it. Those are just my thoughts, I think that's the difference of why Deontay doesn't get the exciting tag. People tuned in for the Stiverne fight, but then he followed up with Molina when he could have tried to get someone else similar to Stiverne at least to keep the wind in his sails.

Entertaining thread. NSB is an odd place, many extreme views. Much of it is trolling to get a reaction out of fans of opposing fighters. I hope. I still remember people so high on Jermain Taylor back in the day. He outworked Hopkins, before that fought guys like Joppy. Then went on to fight Winky (who I thought beat JT), Ouma, Corey Spinks in a close fight. Smaller guys. Finally he fights Pavlik. There was actually an outcry in NSB after that fight. If you can believe it some were outraged how JT didnt get a proper count :lol1: while he was slumped in the corner. While Pavlik did get a 10 count, and how the fight should have been stopped when Pavlik went down. So silly. Personally Im a fan of well matched competitive fights. Fighters who use their talent to overcome their opponent, not relying on excessive clinching and movement that is only used to avoid fighting/waste time rather than movement used to set up retaliation. Refs need to be held accountable and forced to adhere to some level of sameness. Not a fan of politics, nationalism, ethnicity based fanboysism, hyped up olympians spoon fed cab drivers until they get title shots, champs who holding belts hostage, sob story based dismissal of warranted criticism ie Danny Jacobs...etc etc.

LSC is not a dude in that category IMO. If you think that is the reason, ok. He didn't KO Stivernne but had him hurt many times. I understand your point but that just doesn't seem plausible to me. Calling the post race baiting is a childish way of avoiding the point being made. I am one of the biggest Deontay critics here on NSB. We are not discussing criticism, we are discussing why he isn't embraced when he is as "exciting" as anyone in the sport by NSB's definition. Other fighters have been embraced while they are destroying no hopers. When they destroy a no hoper they do not face anywhere near the backlash. That seems odd if "excitement" is what it is all about. Kovalev and Golovkin are on most peoples p4p list, not just on NSB but boxing in general, i don't see Wilder on many lists, and it has ZERO to do with racism so cut that crap out.

Dunn, my man, you left it there in the air open for people to misinterpret about it being racially motivated. People are crapping on Deontay because he fights Salka type opposition, most of the time. The Stiverne wasn't FOTY candidate or anything, but was at least exciting because Stiverne at least has a pulse. But that's one fight in 33 now? If he was always 33-0 while knocking out fringe contenders (you know, the Arreola's of the world) instead of Salka type opposition he would be more liked and labelled as exciting. Respectfully, I can't worry about that but I can understand your point. I will try and refrain from that in the future. You are getting at my exact point- the definition of "exciting". Deontay KOing a bum, well talk about the bum. Garcia KOing Salka, talk about Salka. Kov koing Caparello, talk about Kov's power. GGG koing Monroe, talk about Monroe and his ranking, not if he had a chance or not. Canelo koing Kirkland, talk about the KO, not Kirkland being out for so long. That is a huge difference to me. I'd really like to know why it exists.

LSC is not a dude in that category IMO. If you think that is the reason, ok. He didn't KO Stivernne but had him hurt many times. I understand your point but that just doesn't seem plausible to me. Calling the post race baiting is a childish way of avoiding the point being made. I am one of the biggest Deontay critics here on NSB. We are not discussing criticism, we are discussing why he isn't embraced when he is as "exciting" as anyone in the sport by NSB's definition. Other fighters have been embraced while they are destroying no hopers. When they destroy a no hoper they do not face anywhere near the backlash. That seems odd if "excitement" is what it is all about. Dunn, my man, you left it there in the air open for people to misinterpret about it being racially motivated. People are crapping on Deontay because he fights Salka type opposition, most of the time. The Stiverne wasn't FOTY candidate or anything, but was at least exciting because Stiverne at least has a pulse. But that's one fight in 33 now? If he was always 33-0 while knocking out fringe contenders (you know, the Arreola's of the world) instead of Salka type opposition he would be more liked and labelled as exciting.